Saturday, November 7, 2009

Obama and 2009

There's been a seemingly endless debate this week about whether New Jersey and Virginia were Barack Obama's fault.

But I've found the data point that ends the argument for me.

On April 15th Obama's national approval rating in Gallup was 63%. A Rasmussen poll that day showed Bob McDonnell leading Creigh Deeds 45-30 and a Quinnipiac poll showed Chris Christie leading Jon Corzine 45-38.

Those guys were getting creamed at the height of Obama's popularity. Jon Corzine and Creigh Deeds lost because of Jon Corzine and Creigh Deeds, not Barack Obama. No President is so amazingly popular that he can magically make leads of that magnitude disappear.

"Deeds outperformed Obama among Democrats if I'm not mistaken. He did so because he outperformed Obama among white Democrats."

If you define outperformed as a greater percentage of cast votes, then perhaps. But the under 30 vote in 2009 was half of what it was in 2008. Clearly, Obamas supporters were not motivated to turn out for Deeds. I would not consider that outperforming.

I think it is a rising tide of frustration against politicians in general, by republicans and a majority of independents == enough to make a difference if it continues. It is not directed squarely at Obama but at his policies and his congress that effects those policies. It heads all the way down to a cultural divide, and that is dangerous for any president if it continues on this slippery slope. 2010 will certainly be a downward slide, although I think democrats will keep the majority in both houses; 2012 will be swung at Obama's head, unless the economy turns quickly, Obama veers center with a noticeable effect and Mike Huckabee (Obama's only formidible candidate) doesn't win the nomination.